About your Search

20110701
20110731
STATION
CSPAN 270
LANGUAGE
English 270
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 270 (some duplicates have been removed)
the edges. we should actually fix it so we don't have this big problem which everybody knows is coming. the virtual consensus among economists is that we will have a debt crisis comparable to what greases having today. we want to do something bold that fixes the country and this is that rare opportunity. >> what about the $4 trillion plan that lawmakers have been talking about this week? it does not sound like that would satisfy the criteria? >> we don't know what the $4 trillion is. we hear about that over so many years. we don't know any of the details. that may be part of the cuts and the cap as we go forward. we think you have to look at this away a normal american family would look at this. cuts in the short term and cuts to make sure we are doing a dump and on this problem and the cap means we go forward and don't exacerbate the problem in coming years and then the real fundamental process requiring the federal government to do what every family has to do and every business has to do, have a balanced budget. we think that makes the most sense. >> does that have to be part of this
a big agreement -- a big agreement to try to address the deficit in this country and other issues. that is what we want. that is what the president of the united states wants. but what the speaker of the house said in the same breath is you cannot close loopholes -- corporate loopholes in the tax "-- tax code. you cannot get rid of the loopholes that reward companies for shipping jobs overseas. that you cannot ask the oil and gas companies to no longer take taxpayer subsidies. that is what he said. every bipartisan group that has looked at this issue -- simpson bowles and every other group -- say you need a balanced approach to get something done. that is what the president wants to do. in the same breath to say you want to get a big comprehensive plan and at the same time say you want to protect special interests loopholes in the tax code is, i believe, irresponsible. what is their answer that will bring before the house? the plan to end the medicare guarantee. sentencing is they have to go to the higher insurance market where they will have to pay more. i was just and with this
google, how are we going to create the next big thing -- but make sure that production is here. so it's great that we have an apple that's creating ipods, ipads and designing them and creating the software, but it would be nice if we're also making the ipads and the ipods here in the united states, because that's some more jobs that people can work at. and there are going to be a series of decisions that we've got to make. number one, are we investing in research and development in order to emphasize technology? and a lot of that has to come from government. that's how the internet got formed. that's how gps got formed. companies on their own can't always finance the basic research because they can't be assured that they're going to get a return on it. number two, we've got to drastically improve how we train our workforce and our kids around math and science and technology. number three, we've got to have a top-notch infrastructure to support advanced manufacturing, and we've got to look at sectors where we know this is going to be the future. something like clean energy, for exa
the impact. but i'm wondering, two of the candidates will be coming out after this big debate here in washington. does that give an advantage or a disadvantage or is it unclear based on the outcome? >> well, it's unclear based on the outcome certainly. the congresswoman and the congressman have both been very strong in their opposition. >> no compromise. right? >> that will appeal to many people in the base of the party. and i think what you've heard from some of the other candidates is somewhat more equivocal position. though john huntsman this week came out strongly for the boehner plan and said it was the only plan going and that the republicans and everybody ought to get behind it. congresswoman bachmann in particular, i think, has staked out that kind of tea party position. and she'll probably benefit from that. i think the other candidates are trying to get a piece of that, but try to go more broadly. >> i think bachmann and to a certain extent paul also risk some pleasure of backlash, or could in their don't raise the ceiling at all and their positions, playing down is a pot
a big enough presence for the obama administration for him to fight. i did not mean it as an insult to him or to the senate. even in the world's greatest chamber, these interchangeable. >> in a world where are squashes are limited, the survivors and the the dead appeared >> i think that is true. >> what the declaration is about is how virtually every aspect of our lives we are seeing greater individualization and personalization. personalization. but is our very identity. in politics, we are still stuck between dr. jekyll and mr. hyde. it is the wolf man versus frankenstein. who is really going to get fired up? these are shorthand for the incredible narrow range of things we actually have for. >> these are all leaders. mitch mcconnell has only been in the senate for 26 years. it feels like a sentry. did you write that? >> i think that will play my coat off their masks welch on that one. we are not trying to make light of politics. politics is important. there are things worth fighting over. far to the problem we have is that people have tribal loyalties to team blew and team read. -
and more before there is any kind of a big deal. what's the move then if no meetings are planned today or no action over the weekend. you have the ability to come up with some type of proposal. what is the mood on capitol hill? >> it has ramped up over the last couple of days. there is a sense that this is a critical moment. there needs to be some kind of a deal that comes forth. as august 2 comes near, certainly tension seems to be rising. in the papers, proposes a tax cut or tax increase especially with some of the ways the gang of six proposal lays out the revenue raising. >> there's a sense that initially, when the gang of six came out, the budget chairman talked a lot about how it would be scored as a $1.5 trillion tax cut. there's some sense that even within their own proposal, the gang of six may use a different yardstick to measure things. >> why so long? why not especially when it seems incapable of doing something when it puts it into legislation? in some ways, they've had a new momentum be the idea of a bigger deal possibly still being on the table. we saw a couple weeks ago
, and everything, they give big tax breaks for the oil companies. the big manufacturers. they're taking jobs away from us. and why they think it is best to do that. i need an answer to that, because i work 40 years of my life, and now i'm disabled. and now they're talking about cutting everything. i just don't think -- i've even put my life on the line for this country, vietnam. why they think it's the right thing to do. host: thanks for your call. next up, a comment from hewitt, texas. tony, a republican there. good morning. caller: good morning. how's everybody there this morning? host: it's a little hot both temperature-wise and internally i think here. caller: yeah. you know, we deal with a few facts here this morning. that cut, cap and balance that was passed did two things that everybody just is totally bent out of shape about. one of which is that it would raise the debt ceiling, and we would give that community organizer everything he wanted. it also, at the time, would say that the united states would even have a downgrade in its debt rating. and what do we do? well, you got the presiden
was just a time- passer and he wasn't even a big enough presence for the obama administration to fight for him to be their secretary of health and human services. i don't necessarily mean it as an insult to him or to the senate but let's face it, most of our elected officials even in the world's greatest deliberative chamber are interchangeable. >> you wrote this. "in a world where our choices aren't limited to john boehner and nancy pelosi, the survivors envy the dead." >> yes, i think that's true. >> and explain that? >> what "the declaration of independents" is about is how throughout virtually every aspect of our lives we are seeing greater individualization, personalization, the ability to mongrelize and hybridize our lives and our enjoyments and our very identities, and yet in politics we are still stuck between dr. jekyll and mr. hyde it's the wolf man versus frankenstein. who is really going to get fired up over nancy pelosi on the one hand or john boehner on the other. they are proxies or short-hands for the incredibly narrow range of choice that we actually have in elected of
been seen as the party of big spending in government. right now, voters are in a position where they want to see less spending. one gets down to specifics, they are more on the side of democrats. the paul ryan plan is very unpopular but the measures the democrats propose like increasing taxes on the wealthy and ending subsidies for corporations is very popular the democrats need to reach a credibility threshold on fiscal issues. they need to be willing to say that we need more government accountability. if they can agree to a down payment and get a boat on the record of cutting spending, it helps them reach that far. they want to move to a larger debate where the public is on their side about priorities and what is the next step. they want to from that republicans want to eliminate medicare for those under 55. they can cut some things that will affect the middle class since seniors but we want to end the subsidies for oil companies and the jets owners. if they can get bear rather than debate about cutting spending more or less, going into 2012, there will be a good position. hos
. well, yes and no. in their derrick the church was the big power. kings and queens could not move without the permission of the church. nowadays it is big business. when you have big business influence washington, d.c., people like yourself, this is what you are going to get. you cannot have foxes guarding the hen house. host: all right. your response. guest: if you talk about specific tax credits, i think he's right. i don't think it is just big business. i think it is the aarp, i think it is the big labor unions. i think it is everybody. the whole fact is the federal the whole fact is the federal government is too big and it is in areas it shouldn't be. if you read the constitution, you also read the enumerated powers which gives limited powers to the federal government and specifically states everything not listed here is reserved for the people in the states. the reason we have a $3.6 trillion, $3.7 trillion budget, is a trillion and a half of that or more is stuff that's not our responsibility in the first place. sho look, i'm one of the few republicans that stands up and say
, onewas coming to a a of the big interests in alo and huffington post, walter manchin the field, one of the first things that people said to me was, aol lost his way not because of the business model but because of the community and the ability for people to actually comment on what was happening. as i travel around, whether people commenting on articles they saw or things that they did, one of the most disappointing things that happened at the aol's community- based was not being able to comment. all the common in technology was stripped off of the company. we went from the most engage community to the least engaged in the world. i think that area and i brought that back. when aol went down, they took that away. a lot of the features in facebook were things that he grew up using on a a well. it's an important part of our business in the future. >> for those of us old enough, we remember when you dial up aol and you hear that iconic modem sound and the "you've got mail" peace. to go back to that, you have a startup incubating in a large corporation. is it important for the user to kn
.5 trillion does not make any of the big issues go away. sooner or later republicans are going to have to swallow some revenue increases. host: what is the purpose of today's news conference from the president? caller: the purpose for the president is to set a delicate balance. on the one hand he wants to claim the political high ground, i assume, saying that he tried and pushed for historic bipartisan achievement. unfortunately, we will like it there. the reason is that republicans will not sign on to a bold, $1 trillion tax overhaul. so, he wants to show the voters that he is the big negotiator. everything that he said the revlon in 2008. but he does not want to poison the well to make these negotiations for the rest of the week. >> what is the main message coming from republicans going into this meeting? >> it would seem that their main message is probably going to stay the same period that we are for a big deal, but not a big tax increase. or any tax increase. once again they will be challenged to expand on this sharp rhetorical edge. id is a distinction without much of a differenc
there, isn't that a big mistake? >> i think it is, senator. i think it really goes against shall as i said, 224 years, and also, i think it's important to go back in the face of statements that this would be a shocking thing of the bureau, this is what the president originally proposed. this is not as if -- and what the house of representatives passed, albeit in a staged process. this is not something that has been thought up by people and has not been advocated by people who are very strong advocates of consumer protection and as you said in your opening statement, no one is asking to change the bureau's substantive powers a bit. it is just to create -- >> or its mission. >> or its mission. it is just to create the kinds of responsiveness that really the constitution mandates. >> senator, if i may, the cfpb is subject to oversight by congress. that oversight is not through the appropriations process but that is actually i think quite right. i should not be one to speak to you about how the appropriations process works but appropriations bills involve lots of horse trading and they ar
try to do some pilots to learn more about these things. we institutionally -- when you run a big institution you have to make sure it is not a check the box issue. we have leaders in our produce and we try to create incentives to allow the tasking leaders to work on products that have particular gender dimensions. i want to build it into the dna of people doing this. any time you face a challenge like this, you have to decide on building it as a separate capacity or trying to learn and then integrate it into the organization. we have tried to use the pilots in specialized aspects, trying to use research to increase people's attentiveness, but then how you scale it up. >> one more question. we have two minutes. that is our time. can you briefly comment on the latest demise of the world trade talks? >> i did this recently. i got a little attention. what i would just say is this. the general environment is that doha is doomed. people are looking beyond it. i believe that this would be an extreme tragedy for the international system. at the time we talk about pro- growth trade, we ha
, go big on the debt sale. my number one focus is getting our economy back to a place where businesses can grow and hire. extending tax relief for middle class families and putting construction workers back on the job rebuilding roads and highways. in the past few months they have said, we are willing to cut historic limits in order to reduce our deficit. rpt president obama also said about raising revenues. it is a position that's been taken by everyone from warren buffet to bill o'reilly. it is a position taken in the senate by republicans that are working on a promising plan of their own he writes "right now we have the opportunity to do something big and meaningful." we go to north carolina. we continue our take-off of the wall street journal headline, "america nears the brink." caller: i don't care. they can keep my disability, they can keep my pension. i'll just work like my mom and dad and everybody else did, until i die 678 that's just how it is. it is. like i heard a guy say on the military channel, the stuff that's happened to him because of world war ii. you just have to suc
it is that momentous. the flurry of talk last week about going big and swinging for the fences were underscoring the idea of the president and the speaker to persuade the democratic and republican rank- and-file to go for something as big as $4 trillion. it was a long shot to begin with. both sides decided to spend a few days pursuing this long shot and it turns out that speaker behner blinked first. he was the first one to realize publicly that he did not have the votes in his own troops to get this through because it would require too much. host: if the number goes down from $4 trillion, what gets left behind? guest: you go from $4 trillion down to something. the fall back number we think is $2.50 trillion. that is the amount of deficit reduction that would be necessary to get republicans to vote for an equivalent amount of debt ceiling increase. that is what is required to keep the treasury in the flush to get for the next election. that is the number and we know that the vice president had six members of congress and they were pretty close. they were at about $2 trillion. entirely from the s
] >> of the gop republican priority no. 5 was the reckless domestic budget which extends tax breaks for big oil, cuts education, lifesaving medical research. it cost americans 1.7 million jobs by 2014 with 900,000 jobs lost next year. let's get rid of these guys. >> another example of what the democrats do what we are in the majority -- the children's health insurance program, providing health care for 4 million more children. we did that right out of the gate when the democrats took the majority. >> i get to do all of the republican priorities and you get to the democratic priorities? here is what they get -- if they don't have health care, don't get sick. there repealed patients' rights and limited health care for 32 million americans and allow insurance companies to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. they increased premiums for families and small businesses. boo. >> when the democrats had the majority, we pass the american recovery a reinvestment act cause save the economy from going off the brink, cut sad -- cut taxes for small businesses and invested in building american and the st
, a big thank-you to the staff, without mean, this would not have been possible, as usual. thank you very much for all you did. [applause] let me just say, we have a lot of work to do. let's make hay with the sunshine. those involved in the press conference, could you please go immediately to grand ballroom be because we are late. [laughter] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> wrapping up this session of the national governors' association from salt lake city. we just heard from washington state governor, the chair for this summer's conference. we will have more events throughout the weekend. tomorrow afternoon o'clock 30, the session on remembering 9/11, protecting borders and communities. on sunday at 1:30, the closing session. you will also be able to find all the segments on line in their entirety at c-span.org -- online in their entirety at c- span.org. it >> this weekend, live from salt lake city, the nation's governors look at the net the -- lessons of 9/11, and the featured speaker talks competitivenes
going to do a big thing. it was going to be a big surprise. they get hundreds of thousands of these every week. they have a strong following. every year to a takeover youtube with people taking over youtube about what is awesome in the world. youtube has partnered with them. it has been amazing. it has increased awareness for all of these organizations. to speak to his birthday, on his birthday last year, johnson, hank, you are 30. i realize you do not like many things. you do not like stuff. i did not know what to get you. but then i remembered you like oxygen. for your 30th birthday, we have planted 20,000 trees in your name. then he showed a 10 minute video of people in iraq, all over the united states, almost every continent except antarctica. this beautiful music of people planting trees with signs a said happy birthday, hank. we work with them in the aftermath of the earthquake in haiti. we worked with all of these different people. we reached out to everyone we possibly new including j.k. rowling who sent us seven harry potter bucks. we reached out to the actors in t
to have big shots in the economy, you need to discourage debt and encourage equity including big banks and small banks. >> thank you for being part of this historic hearing. this comes at an historic time for the nation. we received letters from more than 400 ceo's about the pending potential of the fault -- of default on the nation's debt. they said that even a technical -- technical default in this case would have catastrophic events. this happened in 1979 even under the well and tens of congress for it was late resulting in interest rates that plague the country for the next 10 years. given what is happening around the globe, with moody's downgrading ireland again today, what is your advice to the congress in terms of acting and giving the deadlines that secretary of the treasury tim geithner has outlined? >> my advice would be simple and be the same advice as christie and the lifeguard would give the united states. you need to expend the debt ceiling and you cannot play games with something this serious. world financial markets are much more fragile than you would like to believe.
statements in that meeting, because we don't know what the details were of his proposal and the so-called big deal, my insistence was consistent with our speaker's, that we not raise taxes. and that's why that construct doesn't work. we don't have the votes on this side of the aisle. i'm not supportive of raising taxes on people who are trying to make it right now and can't. so i would say to the gentleman when he refers to the other groups that have been out there, all of whom he say suggest that somehow we need to raise taxes, what the gentleman's talking about is how are we going to produce more revenues? we believe, mr. speaker, that you produce more revenues by having growth in our economy. we don't believe that you promote growth in the economy by cranking up the government spending machine by taking money from people who eastern it, washing it through washington's bureaucracy, and sending it back out. we don't believe that. we believe that growth is created through investment, through hard work in the private sector. by entrepreneurs, small business men and women, people who want to su
at the federal reserve. we want to help get rid of the perception of too big to fail. lehman brothers is the only example of a major financial institution in a developed country that was allowed to fail. the evidence clearly puts this to rest the notion that we did not deal nottoo big to fail. there are a couple of areas where i see the attack coming. my republican colleagues, on like climate change and health care, don't want to take this one had on. it is still too popular. coming to the defense of unrestricted derivative trading is not a popular cause. they are coming at it sideways. they want to use the deficit as an excuse for under-funding the sec and cftc. they have a small percentage of what we're wasting trying to build infrastructure in afghanistan. the notion that the $90 million more that we need for the cftc because of the deficit is nonsense. they want to turn the sec into a profit center. you have a catch-22. first denied the sec and the cftc adequate funding. they in turn will not be able to deal with the rulemaking requirements that they have. because they have not been able to m
was ready to try again to do something big to control the debt. the ensuing days, the two sides forged common ground on the strategy raising the debt limit and cutting more than $4 trillion out of the federal budget that would take place through 2021. the speaker put out a statement in connection with the comments he made to the press yesterday. here is a bit of it for you. he said: in the end, he writes, we couldn't connect. not because of different importants, but different visions for our country. the president is emphatic taxes have to be raised. i know that tax increases destroy jobs. the next page, mr. boehner goes on to say, the president is adamant we can't make changes to entitlement program. i know the programs won't be there for my daughter's generation unless significant action is taken now. i have decided to end conversations with the white house and begin conversations with the leaders in the senate in an effort to find a path forward. again, the leaders are going to the white house today to meet with the president. the minority leader also putting out a statement becaus
. host: mississippi, janet is next. caller: i feel as long as our politicians are bought by big corporations, we cannot trust the word that they say. they will do what the corporations want. the supreme court gave corporations the right to be individuals. they do not have rights like individuals. they are individuals themselves but they should not make the decisions as far as who represents the people. a lot of people would call me ignorant, but i know how to balance my checkbook and if these people cannot balance their checkbook, they need to go home and learn how to. host: fixed the political experts from the book -- brookings institution says -- that they hash it out in private first. your thoughts? caller: my thought is that if people cannot get together and talk it out, compromise, what is the use of having separate get together is? tempore i know that i sound ignorant, but people need to sit down in a circle and come to a conclusion. host: another twitter message from boring file clerk, writing -- host: chattanooga, tennessee. gerry, go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span.
that away lessens the number of competitors and would be a very big disaster for competition in this space. >> is there really like my job, and so i am going to say that the merger is going to go through the fcc and the department of justice and i look forward to sing with the outcome is. >> why don't you just tell us what you think and not anyone else? we're discussing the recent fcc report on competition in the wireless industry. we're pleased to be joined by representatives from the wireless industry, and from the free press, a think tank policy group that looks at these telecommunications issues. matt wood is the policy director, paul kirby of telecommunications reports. next question? >> often this report does not get much attention, but because of the merger. they are considering, groups and companies who are proposed the merger say, look, they cannot determine the effective competition for the second year and a row, that shows the merger should not be approved. at&t says we think it shows how many carriers people have choices of. i wanted to get your views on the public's standpoint
here by not paying for and creating an awful lot of debt. not paying for two wars. not paying for big rates, big cuts to forma, medicaid. not paying for to act -- for tax cuts. the president found himself $10 trillion in hole in dealing with the worst recession since the great depression, as well as having to come up with money for a recovery. where did those moneys go? most of them went to help states and municipalities. many used that to stabilize states with a stimulus package that many, including myself, did not think was strong enough to sustain economic recovery. we saw it, no matter how fragile, with the small recovery that we had. one-third of the money of a $1 -- $9 billion package was utilized to help states and municipalities balance their budgets. one-third of the money, the largest tax cuts, went out in the history of the country. people did not really notice it. they started getting extra in their paycheck, but there was nothing in there that said -- this is a big tax cut for you. in one-third of it was used in infrastructure programs. not enough, in my estimation. cert
that they are green facilities. we are very excited about it. >> cloud computing, you said that there were other big names? >> costs are low. our area has low temperatures. you can use a lot of heat exchange type systems to cool the facilities with outside air, making it much more efficient to operate. the largest is on the roof of this facility. >> are you excited about the prospects? >> the rate that things are going from an efficiency standpoint, many businesses are at a point where they are trying to figure out what to do. they need to upgrade those facilities and moved into a facility like ours. move into the cloud. or find resources that are their own. we are excited to be on the edge of technology that is efficient, secure, and saved. we talked about how reliable the facility is. we are the only one in oregon to have the design for the rating. we are very excited about the opportunity. >> how many jobs have you created? >> 10 new in the region. it is a nice piece of the economic puzzle, attracting businesses into the region, getting some of the benefits that central oregon offers. >> i know t
call, while we're waiting, is from big sandy, texas. scott is a republican. good morning. caller: yes, susan, if i were a republican and in the negotiations, i would continue to bring up the immorality that the democrats are willing to -- and the fact that they're willing to steal the liberty of future generations with this humongous debt. they need to hold their feet to the fire, and in the end, obama and the democrats will have to come around. there's no doubt about it. we've got the upper hand. even though you've got the press on the president's side, and i want all these democrats that have called in here supporting obama this morning, just ask yourself, are you honestly better off? has his policies actually helped this country? or is it sending this country to oblivion? none of his policies, none of his stimulus, none of it has worked. not one single bit of it. we're worse off now than when he took office, and we're continuing to go downhill. it's time this iron-headed fool relent and let the adults take over. host: thanks for your call. scott from big sandy, texas. here is speak
been going on now since the big deal talks between boehner and obama broke down on friday among all the congressional leaders on how to fix basically one problem. that is, how long the debt limit increase we will do. they have not been able to resolve that problem. host: do you think there's a chance the house really will leave town? guest: i do not know. no one would confirm that. there were rumors yesterday, mainly from democrats. republicans said they had heard nothing like that. democrats also said they would be surprised if the house would do that. it will look terrible with this crisis hanging over the nation. crisis hanging over the nation. it has happened in on other occasions. host: lori montgomery, according to the senate schedule, harry reid will be announcing the schedule at 11:00 a.m. have you heard anything? guest: i have not. when i left last night, it was not clear. they were still planning to proceed as they have been talking about for a week. that is, when the house bill comes over, they want to tilt it -- to kill it. it's not clear how they will do that. will they
are too big to fail, and that policy has failed. but the one thing that will not fail, for it is to majestic to ever letdown lady liberty, is you, the sovereign american people. [cheers and applause] through your hard work in your principal devotion to bequeathing to your children a better america, have no doubt that we will restructure the government for the future so that it is citizen-driven. we will restructure the wall street banks so we can grow our economy and shape the next american economic century. [applause] we will defend america from her enemies, and we will always support our brave men and women in uniform that are sacrificing so much for our security and liberty. we will expand freedom to the oppressed to ensure freedom at home for ourselves and we will stand steadfast with our allies in this endeavour, notably over deer ally, israel. [applause] and all those seeking to break off the shackles of oppression, be it in iran's green revolution or in a communist oppressed blends guzman revolution, or be it those who stand up to chavez or decastro in latin ame
things that dampen economic growth and the u.k. is finding this out now, they adopted this big austerity budget, and there's a good chance that economic activity will go down so much that tack revenues will be reduced even more than spending is cut, and their deficit will increase. so why are we talking more about the economy and less about this? partly because the republicans who control the house and have a lot of votes in the senate have now decided having quadrupled the debt in the 12 years before i took office and doubled it after i left that it's all of a sudden the biggest problem in the world. [laughter] i'll come back to that. but i want you to think about it. because i hate these deficits. and i was appalled that the debt was doubled in the eight years after i left office. and i think the fiscal condition of the country did make us weaker in dealing with the financial crash. i'll say more about that in a minute. but you have to know about what works. there's almost no discussion in this debate. i read the articles every day about the timing of whatever it is they do and whether
of congress get themselves. anda raw deal in a big way. -- a raw deal in a big way. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: yield one minute to dr. fleming. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana. mr. fleming: thank you. mr. speaker, but for the president of the united states who serves today a a democrat-controlled congress over the last two years we wouldn't be here today debating this. $3.8 trillion added to our debt and continuing on that same glide path. mr. speaker, we're here today because people across america, businesses, cities, states, all have to balance their budgets. the only game in this country, the only entity that doesn't have to balance its budget is the federal government. and that's what's ruining our economy. so all we're asking for in this bill is simply to immediately cut $111 billion in fiscal 2012, begin capping our spending rates, bringing it down to what's traditional, 18%, and then finally passing a balanced budget amendment that will finally put the res
with big business. they break stories on big business is being corrupt. then you have the right of center papers that are obsessed with big corporations -- i mean, with big government. there. it is cool parity i am not for the outing -- the suppression of the adding of corrupt republicans. there is a huge difference. i am totally for all of these republican screwballs to get into trouble getting fired or quit saying today that they get caught, not stretching out for three ludicrous unbelievably weeks. thank you very much, congressman weiner. thank you. i loved every second of it, congressman weiner. especially the hack part. i am the hacker. so we are fighting back. we are entering a phase where objective and neutral journalism is now laughable thing of the fast. it does not exist. i met the people that trotter pretzel themselves into being totally neutral. no one is neutral in the entire world. you have used the cudgel of false neutrality as a means to push the american narrative to the left for the last 40 years. to hell with it. i am sorry that i am being honest and i believe in freedo
was having a difficult time but they're getting killed by the big warehouses that are selling to the folks who like to buy car parts, and, but this isn't just a main street versus internet, because all these internet companies are on main street somewhere. and what happens when we get to the point where everybody is internet? aren't we all just main street? , and aren't we then in the same exact position as we are today where the inter internet, main street retailer in downtown sioux falls, south dakota is competing 3 the internet main street retailer in ogden, utah without the price differential, butting heads against each other trying to steal each other's local customers. # wanted to fix this problem given that there would not be any mainstream stores. i was taken aback because i could not figure a response. i could always think their response. it made me think. what have you tried? what if there is not mean streak in the sense that we think of it today? you can go online to the store around the corner by something dumb and have it shipped to you. i am shopping around the corner on my a
choices today -- do we want to keep repeating ourselves or do we want to look at the big car rise in and do inspirational things we have already challenged ourselves to do? my generation, together with those that followed, built the isf. today anash @ -- nasa and the others want to touch an asteroid and move to mars. the status quo is no longer exceptional. -- acceptable. the students and early career scientist had a ton of energy and enthusiasm. they are excited about the chance to do something new, to be it on the ground floor of the next big frontier of human exploration. to put their big ideas into practice, and they should be. if you are studying in a stems discipline today, you love a great career ahead you, not just at nasa but at other government agencies and academia. when that final shuttle landing occurs, and the cheers and jeers subside, we will keep on moving to where we want to go next. your kids and my grandkids will do things that today we can barely dreamed of. our nation has made great progress the west's history by innovating solutions to meet grand challenges,
with the new committee that would be tasked with coming up with the big solution you talked about by the end of the year. your comment on that proposal. meanwhile in the house, you are saying we can be flexible in our demands of we could get a balanced amendment. is there any way that could be part of a solution? part of a solution? bba means aall, balanced budget amendment. i think i already addressed this question earlier. we don't need a constitutional amendment to do our jobs. the constitution already tells us to do our jobs and make sure that the government is living within its means and making responsible choices. this notion that we are going to go over a multi-year process instead of seizing the moment now and taking care problems is a typical washington response. we don't need more studies. we don't need a balanced budget amendment. we simply need to make these tough choices and be willing to take on our faces. everybody knows it. we could have a discussion right now about what the numbers look like, and we know what is necessary. here is the good news. it turns out we don't have to
sure the motion gets scored and that could be a big pickup in this whole process. that allows things to die. >> that will give them three days to hate it. >> you don't want to deal hanging out there so long because hit a pi like anata. you don't want rank-and-file members to feel like it was crammed down their throats striking that balance on the timing will be critical. >> the deadline to get some the to the floor is what to t? the house republicans announced they canceled one of their work. in their district. >> economists have told me that you will start to seek markets get a little spooked. by the end of next week or early the following week. that is something that will make it from both sides want to avoid. >> does that put more pressure on them? >> absolutely. >> in the week after, they will need a couple of days to debate it in the house and the senate could do it within hours if they have an agreement. if no one tries to filibuster, it will be fairly quick. they should probably start the debate by this week. >> thank you for being part of our program. [captioning performed by
chart has given a lot over the years. we call it the big shot. in the last few years, change has happened in terms of the long-term stability, brief moments of disturbance, changes in 60 years of stability. we reinvented work practices and other practices. what has happened now is in the last 10 years, we are moving to a different kind of infrastructure proven by the digital loss of competition. now we find having a world in which we have constant disruption nearly every year. the challenge is how do you start to leverage that rather than fear that in terms of driving innovation in? it will not slow down for the next 30 or 40 years. let me say this personally. i can recapitulate the last 10 years of my life. it took me from this class to cloud computing come into graphic processing, that is scientific computing a fraction of the cost, now into a very limited form of competing. i have had to relearn almost everything i knew as a computer scientist. dealing with the plains regarding amazon and microsoft. i had to think about how to move these processing units. there are single proc
companies are earning big money. we've got a real problem here. we want to do the right thing and we want to protect people. that is the end of may. i call on senator ihop. >> i want to thank you for holding this important hearing. you and your staff to put a great deal of time and effort into preparing the investigative report the committee released today. i also want to thank those at the federal and state levels who have pushed for the legal action. i want to recognize a former colleague, lisa madigan, the attorney general in illinois who i worked with. she has been active in this field and i welcome heard here this morning. for more than a decade, new hampshire has had a primer for responding to a practice known as cramming. when i served as the state's top law enforcement officer, and oversaw an active protection -- consumer protection bureau which include the publication of consumer protection source book and brochures to provide individuals with information how to protect against cramming. in new hampshire, the public utilities commission is authorized to find service providers and
if a big bank goes under. second, it said to wall street firms, you can't take the same kind of reckless risks that led to the crisis. and third, it put in place the stronger -- the strongest consumer protections in history. now, to make sure that these protections worked - so ordinary people were dealt with fairly, so they could make informed decisions about their finances - we didn't just change the law. we changed the way the government did business. for years, the job of protecting consumers was divided up in a lot of different agencies. so if you had a problem with a mortgage lender, you called one place. if you had a problem with a credit card company, you called somebody else. it meant there were a lot of people who were responsible, but that meant nobody was responsible. and we changed that. we cut the bureaucracy and put one consumer watchdog in charge, with just one job -- looking out for regular people in the financial system. now, this is an idea that i got from elizabeth warren, who i first met years ago. back then -- this is long before the financial crisis -- elizabeth wa
the state of pennsylvania has come in and said defaulting on the debt is not that big a deal. it can be, quote in his words, easily managed. does the senator from arizona agree with that thinking? mr. mccain: as the senator may know, i came to the floor a couple of days ago and made that comment, and the senator from illinois and i are in agreement, point number one. you can prioritize -- i think the senator and every economist i know literally would agree. you can prioritize for awhile where you want what remaining money is left. but the message you send to the world, not just our markets but to the world, that the united states of america is going to default on its debts is a totally unacceptable scenario and beneath a great nation. we are in agreement, number one. mr. durbin: amen. mr. mccain: number two is that to insist, to insist that any agreement is based on the passage through the united states senate of a balanced budget amendment to the constitution of the united states, as i said before, is not fair to the american people because, because the terrible obstructionists on this
. there was money to be had and project. there was the big exciting new they embraced it heartily. as gil said we also had an emerging commercial space market. it is something that has been on the horizon with the carter administration. it was embraced in the reagan administration. by the time we arrived there was $5 billion a year of commercial beginning to get complicated. space business and it was rules of the road, with the proper role of the government is and how to interact with other countries, what we expected and what is the role of government services? utilization of commercial contributor. so that was clearly a large so all those things were the word gets complicated vision of where we get space policy and space needs. as we said before we had a national space council. the president was interested in the area of it and so he was more than happy to have one. we had rate relations and is each one of these guys will tell you, the chemistry inside the white house makes a big and how it is done. difference on what can be done there is internal wrangling for a variety of reasons, things get
not looked at this in the last week or two ago, but the big numbers are going to be interest reduction and employer provided health insurance. people have written about these. these are significant sources of revenue. i think the distortion on health care choice is created because the deduction on health care insurance is significant. housing is hugely important, but i do not think it has to do it leverage in the financial crisis. you look where you can get the kind of money you can talk -- you are talking about. >> excessive leverage in the financial sector. the very biggest bank and their use debt impose risk in the system. it is completely consistent with the broader assessment from the right and from the left in regards to to big to fail. we have tried to do with that in various ways. nobody is impressed. standard and poors said yesterday that they think the government would still have to support major financial institutions if they fail. >> mr. johnson is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mrs. olson, i in your testimony you talked about reform alternatives that you believe s
on energy prices. by the way, there was a big argument on at in "the economist." what has happened is, information technology greatly increase liquidity has transformed that. there is not a consensus within the financial pages that people talk about the impact of speculation. it is a given. republicans are trying to keep them from doing anything about speculation. those are the had on a tax that we have. there is a more subtle one, this attack on a risk retention. i believe that risk retention is the single most important piece of this bill. you know, the response when we used to say there was a problem, what was supposed to be the substitute for risk retention -- the rating agencies. the rating agencies were the ones. you did not need to have the latter worry about this because you could go ask the rating region -- agencies. now, the rating agencies are trying to overdo it. the people who told us that subprime loans were good are now telling us that it is not good. i think they were wrong in both times. that is one of the things that i really wanted to address now. it does of all me
, this is a debate about our economy, and frankly is a big debate about the future of our country. until recently, the president was demanding that the congress increased the debt limit with no strings attached. as a matter of fact, the treasury secretary sent me a letter two days after we were sworn in demanding that we give him a clean increase in the debt limit. i responded and told the treasury secretary at the american people would not tolerate a clean increase in the debt ceiling unless there was serious spending cuts attached and will reform in the way we spent the american people's money. i went to new york city in may and gave a speech to the new york economic club where i outlined the challenges we were facing and i made it clear that we would not increase the debt limit for the cuts that exceeded that increase in the debt limit and that there would be no new taxes and that there would be serious spending reforms put in place. it is time to get serious. i'm confident that the leaders here in the congress can act, the white house will give serious, we will. >> your own aides say that the
of our site. president obama has given us a mission to focus again on the big picture of exploration, the crucial research and development required for us to move beyond where we are. we have the mission to carry out something that will take us further than we have ever been. he has asked us to plan a mission to an asteroid. our spacecraft is approaching one of the biggest in the solar system. we are scuttled to drop into orbit around that asteroid later this month. did the president is asking us to harness that american spirit of innovation, the drive to solve problems with capabilities that are so embedded in our moon. that led us to the loa that american ingenuity is alive and well. it will help us win the future. but only if we put aside ever differences and come together to work hard, dream big, and imagine in the possibilities. the space shuttle is an amazing vehicle. an incredible program that has taught us many things to make tomorrow's expiration possible. every shuttle mission showcases the amazing talent and expertise of of our astronauts in robotics and a science. each mi
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 270 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)